My book about Brexit is out!

[websaway]

Lol.... agreed. Not the best metaphor, but my point being that no one knew what an absolute fustercluck this would turn into. I personally know a few leavers who given the current situation and seeing the fallout have changed their mind. I dont know anyone who voted remain who has know gone.... actually this looks great. We should leave

I know lot's of remainers who said they voted leave but didn't really and say they have now changed their minds. I can tell you what is precious to us all whatever our politics and that is the ballot box. It is sacrosanct. We go into a booth and cast our vote, we can not be bullied in that box and nobody will ever know how we voted. Consider why that is the case and then decide if you want to protect that method of running our country. It's not about polls or heresay, it's about each and every person having the right to vote and when that vote is counted you have to implement the result or face the consequences which would have far worse effects than any no deal brexit or even a Marxist government.

 

[Siusaidh]

Websaway, it will be up to the Scottish Government to work out the wording of IndyRef 2. And up to the people of Scotland to determine their own future. I shouldn't lose sleep over that. If the UK crashes out with a 'no deal' then the options will frankly be pretty straightforward for the people of Scotland. 'Do you want to stay in the UK or don't you?'

Given the significant change in circumstances from the last referendum, we'll have to see what the people of Scotland want. I'm not saying independence is inevitable, but the way Scotland and its interests and views on the EU are sidelined, I hope the English Brexiteers fully understand the possibility that the UK may cease to exist. There's no point waving the flag over Brexit if people end up without a Union to have a Union Jack for. Politicians are playing with fire. Fortunately, in Scotland, calm and measured decisions will be taken, step by step. We'll have to wait and see, but the Scottish Government will draft the Referendum wording. It's up to them.

 

[dee]

I know lot's of remainers who said they voted leave but didn't really and say they have now changed their minds. I can tell you what is precious to us all whatever you politics and that is the ballot box. It is sacrosanct. We go into a booth and cast our vote, we can not be bullied in that box and nobody will ever know how we voted. Consider why that is the case and then decide if you want to protect that method of running our country. It's not about polls or heresay, it's about each and every person having the right to vote and when that vote is counted you have to implement the result of face the consequences which would have far worse effects than any no deal brexit or even a Marxist government.

Absolutely 100% agree. However.... it wasnt a vote. It was a referendum. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that it's purely advisory and allows the decision to then be made. Even as i voted, I had expected there to be further consultation. And that goes both ways... i would have expected the same if it had been a remain vote.

 

[Siusaidh]

If you think the ballot box is sacrosanct (I agree) then if people have changed their minds, the result of any 'update' ballot box will also be sacrosanct. At all times, we need to keep up to speed with what the people actually want.

If people actually have changed their minds... like you say... let the ballot box speak.

They may not have changed their minds, in which case you have nothing to fear. It's obvious that a referendum in 2019 is a more up to date measurement of what people actually want now, than a referendum in 2016. Why should you be running scared of what people want here and now in 2019?

A no deal Brexit isn't even remotely acceptable to most people. If it is, you'll win the 2nd referendum, won't you?

I can go with a sensible negotiated deal-based relationship with the EU. I can't go with a No deal, because it will hit the poorest hardest, and risks throwing us into the arms of Trump. I think that is a moderate position, and a middle ground position that more people hold than the extremist option of crashing out with no deal.

If that's what people actually want, how are we going to establish that - a second referendum is one way.

 

[RobM]

By this logic there should be a referendum every week as the old one (that hasn't been enacted) will not be a 'current' reflection of opinion.
But really just say it like it is. 'We want another referendum because we lost the first one'. No need to hide behind 'oh opinion has changed' or 'voters are dead' or 'people didn't know what they were voting for.' Just say it plain - nobody is fooled. Of course the argument that 'a referendum is not binding' will most likely go out the window if there's another one and it's a remain majority (as it would have done in 2016 had the vote gone the other way)

 

[websaway]

removed

 

[websaway]

If you think the ballot box is sacrosanct (I agree) then if people have changed their minds, the result of any 'update' ballot box will also be sacrosanct. At all times, we need to keep up to speed with what the people actually want.

If people actually have changed their minds... like you say... let the ballot box speak.

They may not have changed their minds, in which case you have nothing to fear. It's obvious that a referendum in 2019 is a more up to date measurement of what people actually want now, than a referendum in 2016. Why should you be running scared of what people want here and now in 2019?

A no deal Brexit isn't even remotely acceptable to most people. If it is, you'll win the 2nd referendum, won't you?

I can go with a sensible negotiated deal-based relationship with the EU. I can't go with a No deal, because it will hit the poorest hardest, and risks throwing us into the arms of Trump. I think that is a moderate position, and a middle ground position that more people hold than the extremist option of crashing out with no deal.

If that's what people actually want, how are we going to establish that - a second referendum is one way.

If you think the ballot box is sacrosanct (I agree) then if people have changed their minds, the result of any 'update' ballot box will also be sacrosanct. At all times, we need to keep up to speed with what the people actually want.

If people actually have changed their minds... like you say... let the ballot box speak.

They may not have changed their minds, in which case you have nothing to fear. It's obvious that a referendum in 2019 is a more up to date measurement of what people actually want now, than a referendum in 2016. Why should you be running scared of what people want here and now in 2019?

A no deal Brexit isn't even remotely acceptable to most people. If it is, you'll win the 2nd referendum, won't you?

I can go with a sensible negotiated deal-based relationship with the EU. I can't go with a No deal, because it will hit the poorest hardest, and risks throwing us into the arms of Trump. I think that is a moderate position, and a middle ground position that more people hold than the extremist option of crashing out with no deal.

If that's what people actually want, how are we going to establish that - a second referendum is one way.

Some of what you say is simply a fearful opinion, which you are entitled to even though it has no factual substance. What you say about democracy and people changing their minds is credible but the result of the 2016 referendum has to be implemented to uphold our democratic system. I see little point in pointing out that if there was an in out referendum carried out again then leave would win by a larger margin than last time. I agree that there could be a change in the result if the dice was loaded.

 

[Edwin]

By this logic there should be a referendum every week as the old one (that hasn't been enacted) will not be a 'current' reflection of opinion.
But really just say it like it is. 'We want another referendum because we lost the first one'. No need to hide behind 'oh opinion has changed' or 'voters are dead' or 'people didn't know what they were voting for.' Just say it plain - nobody is fooled. Of course the argument that 'a referendum is not binding' will most likely go out the window if there's another one and it's a remain majority (as it would have done in 2016 had the vote gone the other way)

There's a much easier way to nip that argument in the bud: make the second referendum legally binding rather than advisory. It can be done. It's happened before. It didn't happen in 2016, but there's no reason not to do so in 2020 or whenever a second referendum might be held.

That way there's no question mark. Whatever the result, politicians must implement it because the law says so.

 

[RobM]

I think it just boils down to MPs (who badly misjudged the public) thinking 'ok how can we ignore the democratic majority whilst still giving the impression that people had a say?' This has all shown what a farce it all is. I'm quite happy with a benign dictatorship but be open about it. Just say 'you don't have a say in this and this is what we're going to do'. It would've saved three years of inevitable pantomime. I said the day after the result that there was NO way the establishment would allow it...and here we are... still....

 

[RobM]

There's a much easier way to nip that argument in the bud: make the second referendum legally binding rather than advisory. It can be done. It's happened before. It didn't happen in 2016, but there's no reason not to do so in 2020 or whenever a second referendum might be held.

That way there's no question mark. Whatever the result, politicians must implement it because the law says so.

I think when people were told 'the government will implement your decision no matter what it is' they thought the government would implement their decision no matter what it was. Sorry if I don't believe you but why should I?

 

[websaway]

Lets say that in the 2015 election UKIP had won a majority in parliament and then passed a bill for an in out referendum on leaving the EU. The government backed a leave policy and sent out literature to every household telling the benefits of leaving and warning of the consequences of remaining. The result of the referendum was to remain. However two thirds of mp's wanted to leave and left the EU regardless of the peoples vote.

 

[Edwin]

I think when people were told 'the government will implement your decision no matter what it is' they thought the government would implement their decision no matter what it was. Sorry if I don't believe you but why should I?

I understand. I made the same point in the book. A lot of commitments were made surrounding the outcome of the referendum. But if we limit the discussion to the legal, then it is fact that the referendum was advisory not legally binding. That's not the same as saying "it shouldn't be implemented". But it's correct to say that no law compels politicians to do so, only the weight of public opinion and previous commitments made.

As I put it: "In other words, the referendum result places a non-legal but still real obligation on the government to try to implement the outcome."

 

[websaway]

Websaway, it will be up to the Scottish Government to work out the wording of IndyRef 2. And up to the people of Scotland to determine their own future. I shouldn't lose sleep over that. If the UK crashes out with a 'no deal' then the options will frankly be pretty straightforward for the people of Scotland. 'Do you want to stay in the UK or don't you?'

Given the significant change in circumstances from the last referendum, we'll have to see what the people of Scotland want. I'm not saying independence is inevitable, but the way Scotland and its interests and views on the EU are sidelined, I hope the English Brexiteers fully understand the possibility that the UK may cease to exist. There's no point waving the flag over Brexit if people end up without a Union to have a Union Jack for. Politicians are playing with fire. Fortunately, in Scotland, calm and measured decisions will be taken, step by step. We'll have to wait and see, but the Scottish Government will draft the Referendum wording. It's up to them.

An in out referendum to leave the UK. That's interesting, would that be a final vote , or would the deal go back to the people, if the UK played hard ball would we tell the scots they did not know what they voted for. Would the scots say leave means leave whatever the destination ?

 

[RobM]

You didn't finish your sentence to be truthful
"In other words, the referendum result places a non-legal but still real obligation on the government to try to implement the outcome provided it is the result they want."

I saw this in a comment section on a blog. 'Democracy EU style'
Denmark 1992 : Maastricht Treaty : 51.7 percent voted NO : Result? forced to vote again (a yes vote 2nd time.. accepted)
Ireland 2001 : Nice Treaty : 53.9 percent voted NO : Result? forced to vote again (a yes vote 2nd time.. accepted)
France 2005 : EU constitution : 54.9 percent voted NO : Result? Ignored.
Netherlands 2005 : EU Constitution : 61.5 percent voted NO : Result? Ignored.
Ireland 2008 : Lisbon Treaty : 53.2 percent voted NO : Result? forced to vote again (a yes vote 2nd time.. accepted)
Greece 2015 : Euro Bailout : 61.3 percent voted NO : Result? Ignored.
UK 2016 : Remain in the EU : 51.9 percent voted NO : Result?... well I think you can guess

It's always amazing how these 'advisory' votes stop being advisory when they please certain people Anyway I think people are getting their knickers in a twist for nothing - don't worry there is no danger of UK being allowed to leave the EU. All you have to hope is that you don't damage your country too much in what you give away in the process.

 

[Sound]

The genie is out of the bottle and we now have to have some flavour of brexit before we all as a country can move on with our lives

Anything else like second referendum or revoking article 50 just adds to the mess.

Edwin if your book gains traction and is picked up by the media you are going to have journalists look at and talk about all aspects of your personal life I hope you have planned for it and are mentally prepared?

 

[websaway]

Edwin the irony of all this is that you are trying to put the tooth paste back in the tube. Your original quote not mine.

 

[Murray]

Edwin if your book gains traction and is picked up by the media you are going to have journalists look at and talk about all aspects of your personal life I hope you have planned for it and are mentally prepared?

I think that might be a worry if he was very pro leaving and had strong views on immigration because hanging someone out to dry as a racist white xenophobe is a juicy story

There wont be a witch hunt on someone who favours remain, not by the media anyway

 

[websaway]

Mairead McGuinness ( irish MEP and vice president of the european parliament ) on Question Time said.
- the Irish government had to keep going back to the people until they understood the argument and gave the right result.

ring any bells
LOL

 

[websaway]

You didn't finish your sentence to be truthful
"In other words, the referendum result places a non-legal but still real obligation on the government to try to implement the outcome provided it is the result they want."

I saw this in a comment section on a blog. 'Democracy EU style'
Denmark 1992 : Maastricht Treaty : 51.7 percent voted NO : Result? forced to vote again (a yes vote 2nd time.. accepted)
Ireland 2001 : Nice Treaty : 53.9 percent voted NO : Result? forced to vote again (a yes vote 2nd time.. accepted)
France 2005 : EU constitution : 54.9 percent voted NO : Result? Ignored.
Netherlands 2005 : EU Constitution : 61.5 percent voted NO : Result? Ignored.
Ireland 2008 : Lisbon Treaty : 53.2 percent voted NO : Result? forced to vote again (a yes vote 2nd time.. accepted)
Greece 2015 : Euro Bailout : 61.3 percent voted NO : Result? Ignored.
UK 2016 : Remain in the EU : 51.9 percent voted NO : Result?... well I think you can guess
.

this post is more relevant than edwins 360 pages of his book.

 

[RobM]

I don't see it is as more relevant. There are those who want to leave and those who don't. Each side has their reasons. However it's intellectually dishonest to *try* and find reasons to remain under any guise than the real one - we lost and we don't like the result. All that says to me is the proponent is deceitful and it doesn't help their cause any. Leavers are not angry at remainers for having a different opinion. They are angry for being branded racists and all kinds of other things, constantly talked down to, cajoled, abused (by the media, the minisiters etc) for wanting (what they believe is) the best for their country and, having been proven to be in the majority, that simply shouldn't be happening a country that claims to be democratic. Orwell doublespeak is here. Democracy = antidemocracy. patriotism = racism. Losing = winning. etc You can say whatever you want, provided it is what I want to hear. Otherwise you're a fascist. You can vote whichever way you want, provided it is the correct way, otherwise you're stupid.